National Governments, Global Citizens

Nothing endangers globalization more than the yawning governance gap – the dangerous disparity between the national scope of political accountability and the global nature of markets for goods, capital, and many services – that has opened up in recent decades. When markets transcend national regulation, as with today’s globalization of finance, market failure, instability, and crisis is the result. But pushing rule-making onto supranational bureaucracies, such as the World Trade Organization or the European Commission, can result in a democratic deficit and a loss of legitimacy.

How can this governance gap be closed? One option is to re-establish national democratic control over global markets. This is difficult and smacks of protectionism, but it is neither impossible nor necessarily inimical to healthy globalization. As I argue in my book The Globalization Paradox, expanding the scope for national governments to maintain regulatory diversity and rebuild frayed social bargains would enhance the functioning of the global economy.

Instead, policy elites (and most economists) favor strengthening what is euphemistically called “global governance.” According to this view, reforms such as those that enhance the effectiveness of the G-20, increase the representativeness of the International Monetary Fund’s Executive Board, and tighten the capital standards set by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision would be sufficient to provide a sound institutional underpinning for the global economy.

But the trouble is not just that these global institutions remain weak. It is also that they are inter-governmental bodies – a collection of member states rather than agents of global citizens. Because their accountability to national electorates is indirect and uncertain, they do not generate the political allegiance – and hence legitimacy – that truly representative institutions require. Indeed, the travails of the European Union have revealed the limits of transnational political community-building, even among a comparatively limited and similar set of countries.

Ultimately, the buck stops with national parliaments and executives. During the financial crisis, it was national governments that bailed out banks and firms, recapitalized the financial system, guaranteed debts, eased liquidity, primed the fiscal pump, and paid the unemployment and welfare checks – and took the blame for everything that went wrong. In the memorable words of outgoing Bank of England Governor Mervyn King, global banks are “international in life, but national in death.”

But perhaps there is another path, one that accepts the authority of national governments, but aims to reorient national interests in a more global direction. Progress along such a path requires “national” citizens to begin viewing themselves increasingly as “global” citizens, with interests that extend beyond their state’s borders. National governments are accountable to their citizens, at least in principle. So, the more global these citizens’ sense of their interests becomes, the more globally responsible national policy will be.

This may seem like a pipedream, but something along these lines has already been happening for a while. The global campaign for debt relief for poor countries was led by non-governmental organizations that successfully mobilized young people in rich countries to put pressure on their governments.

Multinational companies are well aware of the effectiveness of such citizen campaigns, having been compelled to increase transparency and change their ways on labor practices around the world. Some governments have gone after foreign political leaders who committed human-rights crimes, with considerable domestic popular support. Nancy Birdsall, the president of the Center for Global Development, cites the example of a Ghanaian citizen providing testimony to the US Congress in the hope of convincing American officials to pressure the World Bank to change its position on user fees in Africa.

Such bottom-up efforts to “globalize” national governments have the greatest potential to affect environmental policies, particularly those aimed at mitigating climate change – the most intractable global problem of all. Interestingly, some of the most important initiatives to stem greenhouse gases and promote green growth are the products of local pressures.

World Resources Institute President Andrew Steer notes that more than 50 developing countries are now implementing costly policies to reduce climate change. From the perspective of national interest, that makes no sense at all, given the global-commons nature of the problem.

Some of these policies are driven by the desire to attain a competitive advantage, as is the case with China’s support for green industries. But when voters are globally aware and environmentally conscious, good climate policy can also be good politics.

Consider California, which at the beginning of this year launched a cap-and-trade system that aims to reduce carbon emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. While global action remained stalled on capping emissions, environmental groups and concerned citizens successfully pushed for the plan over the opposition of business groups, and the state’s Republican governor at the time, Arnold Schwarzenegger, signed it into law in 2006. If it proves a success and remains popular, it could become a model for the entire country.

Global polls such as the World Values Survey indicate that there is still a lot of ground that needs to be covered: self-expressed global citizenship tends to run 15-20 percentage points behind national citizenship. But the gap is smaller for young people, the better educated, and the professional classes. Those who consider themselves to be at the top of the class structure are significantly more globally minded than those who consider themselves to be from the lower classes.

Of course, “global citizenship” will always be a metaphor, because there will never be a world government administering a worldwide political community. But the more we each think of ourselves as global citizens and express our preferences as such to our governments, the less we will need to pursue the chimera of global governance.

Comments

Perhaps there will be a global government one day. See Star Wars? If man can write about something in Sci Fi, it can happen. LOL

ETUI Ad

Europe’s Dilemma: Austerity Revisited Or A New Path For Sustainable Growth

Although the Juncker Commission has included in its programme some new accents, such as Europe’s strategic investment plan, the Eurogroup’s negotiations with the new Greek government have made it clear that EU leaders remain reluctant to let go of their failing austerity narrative. Contrary to their claims that there is no alternative, several of the world’s top economists have developed alternative solutions to tackle Europe’s debt crisis.

At this special conference, renowned economists Prof. James Galbraith, University of Texas at Austin, Raymond Torres, Director of Research at the ILO, Heiner Flassbeck, former German State Secretary and Director of Flassbeck-Economics, and Prof. Benjamin Coriat, Université Paris 13, will provide their analysis of Europe’s protracted crisis and introduce concrete alternatives on how to reshape Europe’s economy for sustainable growth, investment, jobs and equitable prosperity.

Bernadette Ségol, ETUC General Secretary will give the closing remarks. The conference will be chaired by Philippe Pochet, ETUI General Director.

Eurofound Ad

As a result of the economic and financial crisis, many EU governments have reduced funding for healthcare services as one approach to balancing their budgets. Patients have been required to pay larger shares of their healthcare costs themselves, and availability of healthcare services has been reduced.

This report explores which population groups have experienced reduced access to healthcare as a result of the crisis. It presents examples of measures taken by governments and service providers to maintain access for groups in vulnerable situations. The drive for more effective and efficient healthcare is not new, but this report discusses its relationship to access to healthcare services in the context of the crisis.

S&D Group Ad

Progressive Economy is holding a public conference on reconciling economic growth and social progress in the European Parliament on 4 March 2015. The conference will be an opportunity to exchange views on this crucial theme with Commissioner Moscovici, Luxembourg Minister Nicolas Schmit, S&D Members of the European Parliament, high-level academics and experts from Solidar, ILO and ETUC.

There will also be a presentation of the independent Annual Growth Survey 2015 by the authors from OFCE, IMK and ECLM.

Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung AD

Contours Of A European Minimum Wage Policy

by Thorsten Schulten

Demands for a European Minimum Wage Policy, which fundamental aim is to guarantee every worker in Europe an equitable wage, differ. So far minimum wages in many European countries are set at rather low levels and are thus insufficient to prevent income poverty.

A possible European Minimum Wage Norm according to which all national minimum wages should at least be equivalent to 60 per cent of national median wages would affect about 28 million workers or 16 per cent of the overall European workforce. A European Minimum Wage Policy could also contribute to a better coordination of wages in Europe in order to stabilise domestic demand and to prevent deflationary developments.

ILO Ad

World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2015

The World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2015 includes a forecast of worsening global unemployment levels and explains the factors behind it, such as continuing inequality and falling wage shares. The report looks at the drivers of the rising middle class in the developing world as well as the risk of social unrest, especially in areas of elevated youth unemployment. It also addresses structural factors shaping the world of work, including an ageing population and shifts in the skills sought by employers.